UNITED NATIONS - / MaximsNews Network / 21 April 2008 -- This workshop was a follow-up to a July 2005 conference on Future Multilateral Economic Cooperation with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) sponsored by the Stanley Foundation and the German Council on Foreign Relations in Berlin, and to a June 2006 national workshop on knowledge sharing with the DPRK sponsored by the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) in Seoul. 

A multinational, informal working group drawn from participants in these  events worked collaboratively to plan the workshop and will continue to facilitate future efforts to expand international cooperation in knowledge sharing with the DPRK. 

This report is available online at the sponsors’ Web sites at www.stanleyfoundation.org and http://www.kiep.go.kr/eng/, and also at the National Committee on North Korea Web site at www.ncnk.org. Selected papers presented at the workshop are also available online at these Web sites. 

The rapporteur prepared this report following the conference. 

It contains interpretations of the proceedings and is not merely a descriptive, chronological account. Participants neither reviewed nor approved the report. 

Therefore, it should not be assumed that every participant subscribes to all recommendations, observations, and conclusions.

Executive Summary

A recent international workshop convened by the Stanley Foundation and the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy brought together practitioners from a variety of organizations and governments to discuss experiences and ways to improve cooperation in knowledge-sharing activities with the DPRK on economic issues. 

One major topic addressed was how cooperation in knowledge sharing on involvement in the international economy and meeting domestic challenges could help build good relations and trust between members of the international community and the DPRK, and contribute to creating an environment supportive of positive progress in ongoing political and security talks as well as longer-term modernization efforts. 

Practical issues in arranging and implementing knowledge-sharing activities were discussed so that ways could be found to improve efficiency and effectiveness of such activities for the benefit of all stakeholders. 

Another major topic addressed the implications of the October 2007 inter- Korean summit and the agreements reached on deepening inter-Korean economic cooperation for knowledge-sharing activities. 

An important dimension is what this means for the role and activities of the international community in supporting or reinforcing inter-Korean initiatives that promote peaceful and pragmatic solutions to the longer-term challenges on the Korean peninsula. 

Important considerations for future knowledgesharing initiatives with the DPRK on economic issues include building on lessons of experiences, promoting partnerships, addressing the need for more data about conditions in the DPRK, developing in-country knowledge-sharing facilitation capacities, sharing international best practices, improving coordination mechanisms, and providing leadership for carrying this agenda forward.

Although prospects remain uncertain, North Korea and the other nations in the six-party talks are slowly inching their way back from the height of confrontation following the October 2006 detonation of a nuclear device by North Korea. 

If the six-party process continues to make progress, leading toward denuclearization of the peninsula and a peace regime, there will be a need to develop greater and deeper avenues of communication and cooperation between the DPRK and others in the international community, critically including knowledge sharing. 

This report summarizes the results of an international workshop sponsored by the KIEP and the Stanley Foundation, and with the collaboration of the National Committee on North Korea, in Seoul on November 1 and 2, 2007. 

The workshop brought together approximately 30 practitioners from multilateral organizations, governments, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and universities to discuss ways to improve cooperation in knowledge-sharing activities with the DPRK, with a focus on economic development. 

The workshop was a forum for sharing of information for present and prospective participants in knowledge relationships. 

The workshop considered prospects for future cooperation in knowledge sharing from two perspectives. 

One perspective was the desire by members of the international community to promote better understanding between North Koreans and different segments of international society, to help North Koreans deepen their relations with and involvement in the international economy, and to address domestic challenges. 

In this regard, the workshop discussed how cooperation in knowledge sharing could build good relations and trust between members of the international community and the DPRK, as well as create an environment supportive of progress in political talks and longer-term modernization efforts. 

Practical means of arranging and implementing knowledge-sharing activities were also discussed. 

The other major perspective addressed the implications of the October 2007 inter-Korean summit and the agreements to deepen inter-Korean economic cooperation in knowledge-sharing activities. 

What will this mean for the role and activities of the international community in supporting or reinforcing inter-Korean initiatives that promote peaceful and pragmatic solutions to the longer-term challenges on the Korean peninsula? 

There are similarities between what South Koreans can pursue in knowledge-sharing activities with the DPRK and what the international community can accomplish through bilateral and multilateral cooperation. 

Important considerations for future directions include more sharing of lessons learned, promoting partnerships, obtaining more data about conditions in the DPRK, building in-country knowledge-sharing capacities, sharing international best practices, improving coordination mechanisms, and providing leadership for carrying this agenda forward.

What is knowledge sharing? 

The phrase “knowledge sharing” was carefully chosen for this workshop. 

Any international efforts that are undertaken in a spirit of cooperation in order to assist decision makers and professional experts in tackling challenge need to be grounded in respect for the dignity of the North Korean people and an understanding of their legitimate interests. 

To paraphrase former Secretary of Defense William Perry in his 1998 review of US policy of engagement with the DPRK, “We must understand and deal with the North Koreans as they are and not as we wish they would be.” 

Decades of isolation from the international community and dedication to ideologies and domestically designed frameworks for social and economic activity have created the context for cooperation with the DPRK that must be understood and approached in practical ways. 

Knowledge sharing is an important mechanism to achieve this. Knowledge sharing encompasses topics and activities that fall within the areas of humanitarian relief, economic development, environmental protection, social and cultural understanding, and human rights. While all of these areas are important in the DPRK context, each international partner assigns them a different emphasis and priority. 

Terms such as technical assistance and training may be acceptable to some partners and not to others at this stage of relations with the DPRK. 

Though workshop participants could not reach consensus on a precise definition of knowledge sharing, they acknowledged that this is a flexible concept that stakeholders can adapt and modify as they wish. 

It is therefore important to clarify assumptions to avoid misunderstandings. 

The workshop participants agreed that knowledge sharing requires patience and mutual willingness to engage in learning. 

While international partners may believe that the DPRK has much to learn from the outside world, the also need to be receptive to learning about North Korea: its knowledge, experience, worldview, and of course domestic political considerations and international security fears. 

If outsiders want to engage in knowledge sharing, they must understand the factors that may inhibit, motivate, or facilitate the assimilation of new knowledge and perspectives. 

As North Korea interacts more with the outside world, knowledge sharing will allow North Koreans to expand the range of relationships and offer greater opportunities to explain their priorities and decision-making processes. 

The workshop drew special attention to the importance that North Koreans attach to the practical application of their learning opportunities at home. 

The DPRK wants to demonstrate both the tangible benefits and the practical relevance of participation in knowledge activities. 

Understanding North Korea’s motivations for participating in knowledge sharing will help outside partners to design broader and deeper knowledge-sharing activities. 

The participants in the workshop also agreed that implicit in knowledge sharing is the creation of strong relationships. 

Workshop participants emphasized that patience and flexibility are indispensable qualities in knowledge sharing with North Koreans and that knowledge sharing should be seen as a long-term process of relationship building, not a short-term one. 

Understanding why partners are willing to engage in knowledge sharing is a necessary part of the relationship-building process. 

Finally, building relationship  and instilling trust are valuable objectives in their own right, quite apart from the utility of the knowledge that may be imparted through cooperation in knowledge-sharing activities. 

Knowledge sharing is therefore a means to achieving valuable ends, not an end in itself. 

Building relationships and providing tools that could enhance the peaceful resolution of differences and support problem solving that improves the quality of life conditions are the underlying goals of expanding and improving knowledge sharing with the DPRK.

Workshop participants identified several important considerations in planning knowledge-sharing activities with the DPRK.

Linkage to political processes. 

One important consideration in the DPRK context is the extent to which political endorsement or linkages should be sought in knowledge-sharing activities. 

A strong political commitment to knowledge sharing by the DPRK has the potential to facilitate visa approvalsand travel agreements. 

At the same time, the closer the linkage, the more constraints the knowledge-sharing activities encounter in the course of difficult negotiations.

For this reason, financiers and providers of knowledgesharing activities with the DPRK need to be attentive to their objectives and to the conditions that will be most conducive to their success. 

Workshop participants noted that the general political environment has improved in recent months, allowing for resumption of stalled knowledge-sharing activities and cautious optimism that this climate for engagement will enable more forward-looking and expansive activities in 2008.

It was also recognized that in times of political tension some Track 2 and NGO activities have continued without interruption. 

Governments and international public opinion are fixated on the DPRK’s nuclear weapons program and its threats to the region and to global nuclear nonproliferation. 

The six-party talks have had uneven success in resolving international concerns about the DPRK nuclear program. 

While prospects for success are brighter than they were, a major breakthrough with transformative consequences is still a hope, not a plan. 

In this environment, workshop participants agreed that knowledge-sharing activities that foster cooperation could contribute to positive progress in the six-party talks. 

Linking knowledge-sharing activities to the talks can clarify and develop consensus on technical solutions and build trust in six-party mechanisms. 

An example of such positive linkage is the DPRK’s invitation to nuclear experts from the United States, China, and Russia to discuss dismantling the Yongbyong reactor. Workshops among economic experts on topics related to the negotiations are another possibility. 

It was noted that if the nuclear talks enter a Phase 3 in 2008, there might be more potential for knowledgesharing activities. 

Even so, participants admitted that knowledge-sharing activities linked to the six-party process have limited value and also face some risks, including dependency on political developments and potential disconnect from other frameworks for cooperation. 

Workshop participants also acknowledged that separating knowledge sharing from the six-party talks or other political engagement frameworks has definite advantages. 

One advantage is that such activities can be planned with more certainty and flexibility. 

Another is that relationships can be established and developed in a neutral way that may be valuable for maintaining communication and connections despite political developments. 

These can be critical should tensions rise between the DPRK and the other six-party states. 

A third advantage is that such activities in themselves are an indication of North Korea’s interests and its willingness to engage with outsiders.

Foreign language preparation. 

The ability to communicate is critical for knowledge sharing. 

Korean participants in the workshop emphasized the language advantage of knowledge sharing by South Korean organizations and the value of having a shared language for advancing inter-Korean relationships. 

While acknowledging the Korean language as a communications asset, participants recalled the reluctance of the DPRK to grant visas to Korean speakers or Korean monitors, and the tendency of the DPRK to limit the scope for interaction and access to information materials originating from South Korea. 

The workshop participants also cited the need for significantly expanded foreign language (especially English) capabilities in the DPRK for increased knowledge sharing with the international community. 

It was also noted that many concepts and words have no counterparts in the North Korean language and that broader understanding and more concerted efforts to meet these communications challenges are needed. 

Providing resources to expand in-country, foreign language preparation for North Koreans selected for overseas study was seen as an urgent issue for the DPRK authorities and their international partners.

International standards and DPRK realities. 

Workshop participants discussed the differences between international expectations and standards of “good governance” and the DPRK’s interpretation of these issues. 

It was recognized that extensive interaction with the global community requires adherence to international best practices and standards. 

A coherent approach among international partners would facilitate the learning process and contribute to adjustment in policies and practices over time. 

At the same time, participants cautioned that patience and flexibility were needed to deal with these issues in the DPRK. 

One role of knowledge sharing is to create better understanding on both sides and eventual willingness to adopt international standards.

Workshop participants noted that the DPRK has established counterparts for foreign partners primarily along national lines. 

Thus different arrangements exist for inter- Korean and multilateral organization activities than for bilateral cooperation between the DPRK and foreign partners. 

The multiplicity of counterpart arrangements coupled with internal communications and coordination difficulties means that coordination and collaboration in knowledge-sharing activities across these boundaries is awkward. 

Fragmentation also limits the capacity on the North Korean side to increase the number of parallel partnerships. 

Furthermore, bilateral-cooperation frameworks vary and cause misunderstandings. 

These realities pose challenges and choices for foreign partners who prefer more coherence and coordination in activities that are being supported by the international community. 

Participants agreed that direct discussions with North Korean authorities on these and related coordination issues are needed and that mechanisms to advance this dialogue should be put in place. 

It was also noted that sectoral frameworks might be more feasible and desirable to coordinate the discussion of multilateral knowledge sharing than crosscutting frameworks. 

A paper outlining how multiparty discussions might be organized for the agricultural sector was presented as a possible model. 

It was noted that the scope of knowledge sharing in agriculture includes remediation and updating of technical information, correcting misconceptions, and creating opportunities for North Korean partners to test and apply known best practices. 

There are also problems with sustainability of new technologies and equipment and with institutional obstacles within the DPRK that can be addressed through knowledge sharing. 

Among the suggested innovations were local and international workshops in which multiple parties collaborate in agriculture, informal networking, and development of an online database or list server with regular updates. 

Also desirable would be information sharing on the scope and content of knowledge-sharing programs, including the identity of participants and project results, and the development of longer-term training programs. 

Shifting the focus explicitly to development and adopting a common multiparty strategy to develop DPRK agriculture should be the goals of a future sector approach to knowledge sharing. 

Workshop participants agreed that sectoral approaches would probably have high value for both DPRK agencies and for international participants. 

In addition to agriculture, other high priority sectors would be finance, energy, transport, health, and language training.

Knowledge sharing requires a clear and disciplined understanding of what knowledge is and is not. 

Participants were reminded that neither data in itself nor analysis in itself constitutes knowledge. 

It was noted that much writing about the DPRK starts with a view and finds the facts to fit that viewpoint, and that there is a lot of disinformation in the public arena. 

Reliable data sources and skilled nonpartisan analysis are needed to obtain usable knowledge. 

Since not everything that claims to be data and analysis is worth sharing, some filtering or assessment process should be part of knowledge-sharing activities with the DPRK. 

From this perspective, knowledge is more substantial in some sectors of the DPRK than in others. 

For example, more knowledge is available to the international community for agriculture, nutrition, education, health, and women and children than other areas such as infrastructure and industry. 

It should also be noted that some international entities are more willing to share knowledge than private businesses and some NGOs with limited resources or vulnerabilities. 

Workshop participants agreed that international collaboration and funding to improve the scope, quality, and availability of knowledge about the DPRK is important for future efforts, and to be successful and acceptable this must be done in cooperation with the DPRK.

The inter-Korean relationship and implications for international cooperation in knowledge sharing.

South Korean participants in the workshop presented perspectives on developments in the inter-Korean relationship, especially emanating from the October 2007 summit meeting of the two Korean leaders. 

Participants also discussed the implications for future knowledge-sharing activities between the two Koreas and implications for involvement of the international community in inter-Korean reconciliation and eventual unification. 

Workshop participants agreed that integration of the processes for advancing inter-Korean relations with the role of knowledge-sharing activities supported by the international community is a potentially fruitful area for future collaboration.

Workshop participants identified the following important considerations in advancing this agenda:

Giving heightened credibility to North-South exchanges and cooperation can foster the paradigm shift needed to achieve the turnaround in inter- Korean relations that is embedded in the 1992 Basic Agreement and October 2007 Declaration on the Advancement of North-South Relations, Peace, and Prosperity. 

Progress in inter-Korean knowledge sharing is thus a critical part of the long-term process of reconciliation unification that leaders of both Koreas want. 

While this commitment must be grounded in resolving security issues and creating a peace regime (by expanding interactions in all fields), South Koreans can offer North Koreans opportunities to familiarize themselves with concepts that are unfamiliar to the DPRK but that are necessary to reap the benefits of increased interaction with the international community. 

Workshop participants observed that the international community must understand the South Korean vision of the role of knowledge sharing in advancing national goals in its shifting relationship with the DPRK. 

Furthermore, knowledge-sharing activities should be designed to complement those of South Koreans.

Expanding inter-Korean economic relations provides new opportunities for knowledge sharing. 

The growth of bilateral trade, the October summit agreements to expand South Korean investment in enterprise zones in the DPRK, and new joint projects in West Sea cooperation, infrastructure, and shipbuilding will create significant new opportunities for informal contacts and structured learning initiatives. 

By opening up the Kaesong industrial zone to third-country investors, the international community can also take advantage of these opportunities. 

South Koreans welcome the involvement of international community organizations in knowledge-sharing activities that are aimed at supporting the inter-Korean cooperation agenda. 

However, it is not clear that North Koreans are ready to embrace such multiparty participation in inter-Korean affairs. 

Workshop participants noted that that opportunities should be sought to discuss the feasibility of such cooperative activities in the future.

Despite these expanding relations, the DPRK is resistant to South Korean “teaching” and has not been willing so far to discuss economic management issues with South Korean counterparts. 

This reluctance of the DPRK to appear unduly influenced by South Korean economic policy expertise reflects the extent to which political competition between the two Korean systems overshadows the unification process. 

Workshop participants noted that the DPRK is more open to engaging in knowledge sharing on the sensitive economic issues with European and other international partners and that it is important to acknowledge that different partners can fill different niches in the large scheme of knowledge sharing with the DPRK. 

It was also believed that carefully designed joint programs that are open to South Korean and non-Korean participants can be instrumental in bringing expertise and perspectives together.

South Korean contributions to the incentive structure for North Korean participation in knowledge sharing include the advantages of a common language and culture, and the ability to raise funds from both the public and private sectors. 

However, an international coordination mechanism is needed under which the South Korean provision of knowledge-sharing activities can be more consistent with the activities of foreign partners. 

At the moment, South Korean knowledge activities are coordinated by the Ministry of Unification, which also functions as a repository and disseminator of knowledge about the DPRK. 

Efforts to expand the role of research institutes and NGOs in arranging consultations and organizing meetings with North Korean groups will provide new opportunities for knowledge sharing between South Korean and North Korean organizations. 

But there is no specific framework for realizing the benefits of collaborating with foreign partners in knowledge activities with the DPRK and the impact this could have in coordination, resource mobilization, and negotiations. 

Possibilities include utilizing Korean trust funds in multilateral organizations, revitalizing the Tumen River Commission as a cooperation framework, and establishing an informal, consultative group type of mechanism for knowledge sharing that could eventually evolve into a more formal mechanism for coordination of development assistance. 

While participants applauded continued inter-Korean cooperation and collaboration, they urged that knowledge-sharing activities be carried out in a broader international framework for better coordination and to ensure that international best practices and standards are observed.

Workshop participants reviewed the experiences of organizing and conducting knowledge-sharing activities from the perspectives of Australia, Canada, China, South Korea, Switzerland, Sweden, and the United States. 

The European Union also made a presentation on its activities and experiences, highlighting an economic workshop in Pyongyang in late October. 

The World Bank summarized lessons learned from experiences with transition countries in Asia.

It was noted that since 1997 there has been a significant increase in the number of knowledge-sharing activities sponsored by international partners, especially between the inter-Korean Summit of 2000 and of 2004, in the wake of a period of experimentation with economic reforms in the DPRK. 

Disappointment with the outcomes of these economic reforms, reductions in humanitarian aid relationships, and renewed attention to missile and nuclear testing programs led to a sharp decline in knowledge-sharing activities by 2006. 

Only recently have there been signs of a resurgence in knowledge-sharing activities. An assessment of knowledge-sharing activities undertaken between 1997 and 2006 noted that field trips and short-term training accounted for about 70 percent of all activities during this period and that conferences played a significant role. 

Book and data exchanges were identified as the simplest and field trips as the speediest types of knowledge-sharing activities, while potentially high-impact activities such as joint research and support for establishing institutes were shown to be of limited feasibility. 

From the perspectives of feasibility, cost, effectiveness, and continuity, short-term training activities appear to be the most attractive type of knowledge sharing. 

Experience with other transition countries in Asia suggests that joint studies and conferences may eventually become important mechanisms for knowledge sharing with the DPRK.

Workshop participants identified a number of important crosscutting themes from experiences that should be factored into the planning of future knowledge-sharing activities by the international community.

The DPRK has a system of assigning different counterparts to work with foreign partners. 

This compartmentalization inhibits both internal and external coordination. There is a lack of transparency, a low level of experience, minimal understanding, and risk-aversion in dealings between foreign partners and counterpart officials. 

In some instances, turnover of counterpart officials is high. 

Other factors that need to be considered in planning knowledge-sharing activities with DPRK counterparts are the DPRK internal planning cycle, lengthy and opaque procedures, priority given to domestic Korean matters such as holidays sensitivities to some terminology, and practical constraints such as lack of transport or communication with other parts of the system. 

In planning activities that involve travel to or from the DPRK, it is important to pay attention to details such as countries with accessible visa-issuing facilities, complex procedures for obtaining passports and making flight reservations, and lack of cash and foreign currency for North Korean travelers. 

In managing these on-the-ground challenges for working with DPRK counterparts it is important to have clarity about roles and expectations, be willing to make changes as conditions warrant, provide immediate hands-on troubleshooting, use local embassy influences, have qualified and committed local staff, and demonstrate predictability and transparency in leading by example. 

Trust only grows with results.

Selection of participants in knowledge-sharing activities. 

The means of selecting participants was identified as an important area in which the sharing of experiences among foreign partners and dialogue with North Korean authorities would be worthwhile. 

If knowledge-sharing activities are to have any impact, participants should have suitable qualifications and language skills. Establishing English language training for prospective candidates for knowledge-sharing activities is an idea worth exploring. 

The job assignment of people after returning from a knowledge-sharing activity was mentioned as an indicator of impact, and several positive examples were raised in the discussion.

Language and conceptual gaps. 

Quite apart from foreign language proficiency, gaining understanding and confidence in applying concepts foreign to North Korean experience, especially in economic development, is a major constraint. 

This affects Korean and foreign language interactions. A more systematic effort to address this issue would be worthwhile.

Value of in-country facilitating capabilities. 

For planning and administering knowledge-sharing activities, it is helpful for a permanent local presence to support interaction. 

With a potentially growing number of partners, having a local organization to support organizations’ planning and logistical tasks would both facilitate the work of foreign partners and ease the burden on North Korean counterparts.

Responding to requests from North Koreans for financial inducements, gifts, or hardware such as computers is an issue that organizers and financiers of knowledge- sharing activities have to face. 

It would be desirable for international partners to agree on how best to handle these requests, perhaps by creating an incentive structure for cooperation and by giving North Koreans options in negotiations. 

International concerns about corruption have to be weighted against the practical problems faced by North Korean participants and the environment for international engagement with the DPRK. 

Transparency is an important principle that should be adopted.

Particularly for knowledgesharing activities involving foreign travel, North Koreans need to demonstrate how the knowledge obtained can be applied. 

This often leads to North Koreans requesting documentation that they can take home as evidence of the value of the opportunity.

Knowledge sharing is an important component of humanitarian and development assistance projects. 

There is great value in the informal exchanges that take place during field trips and in project-implementation monitoring and activities, and this exemplifies the principle of mutual learning. 

One complication is that North Korean interest in the physical components of the project often leads to underestimation of the knowledge components. 

Also, North Korean reservations about humanitarian and development activities that bring foreigners into contact with ordinary North Koreans can limit the effectiveness of knowledge sharing.

Knowledge-sharing activities sponsored by governments can be influenced by political developments. 

For example, the willingness to organize or fund knowledge-sharing activities was severely curtailed after the 2006 North Korean missile and nuclear tests. 

NGO activities funded by private sources are less vulnerable to political ups and downs but nonetheless are affected by the attitudes both of the home government and of the DPRK.

Absorptive capacity constraints. 

A variety of factors affect the absorptive capacity of North Korean institutions, and this limits the expansion of knowledge-sharing activities in the DPRK. 

Among these constraints are political sensitivities and decision-making processes, inability to meet the requirements of foreign partners, lack of interpreters where translation is required, and problems with interagency coordination. 

Understanding and overcoming these constraints will be an important area for collaboration between foreign partners and North Korean authorities.

Importance of commitment to long-term engagement. 

Workshop participants agreed that the challenges of knowledge sharing in the DPRK environment will take time to overcome and that patience and a long-term commitment to collaboration and problem resolution are needed 

• At present, knowledge sharing is an essential modality for constructive engagement with the DPRK. 

Regardless of the prospects for transformational developments that might come from multilateral and bilateral diplomacy, knowledge sharing is a necessary if not sufficient component of engagement with the DPRK, one that can bring peaceful and pragmatic solutions to many of the DPRK’s problems.

• Clarifications of what different agencies mean by knowledge sharing and the ways in which knowledge sharing pertains to their institutional goals and mandates is needed to improve understanding among partners in knowledge-sharing activities.

• Knowledge sharing should be guided by the principles of results-oriented programming, where expectations of partners are clearly defined and desired outcomes are feasible. 

All efforts to enhance the quality and quantity of knowledge-sharing activities should bear this principle in mind.

• Researching and sharing the lessons learned in knowledge sharing with the DPRK can inform future knowledge-sharing activities. 

Programming such activities requires both a willingness on the part of the organizations involved to share such information, and the willingness to adapt approaches that will reflect these lessons.

• International best practice and experiences from other countries have a role to play in promoting enhanced, results-oriented knowledge sharing with the DPRK. The international community should give a high priority to these lessons in the DPRK context.

• A principle of promoting knowledge partnerships should be embraced for future programming of knowledge-sharing activities with the DPRK. 

This applies both to the concept of ownership that comes from DPRK-led initiatives that are supported by international partners, and the concept of multiple-partner coordination and collaboration among the foreign organizations working with the DPRK.

• Assembling, vetting, and sharing dispassionately analyzed data and knowledge about the DPRK should be given more attention by the international community. Resources and decisions about feasible modalities for doing this will be needed.

• More international conferences with a theme of knowledge sharing are needed, and it is important that these be planned in collaboration with North Korean partners. 

These should be organized both for sectoral groupings and for discussions of crosscutting themes and issues. 

Similarly, it is important to find ways to develop a multiparty dialogue mechanismwith the DPRK on issues related to knowledge sharing.

• An in-country knowledge-sharing facilitation capability would help agencies in the planning and administration of specific activities and strengthen their coordination. 

This capability could take the form of a Liaison Unit for Knowledge Sharing, modeled on the successful Food Aid Liaison Unit.

• Coordination among international partners is needed at three levels: information sharing, joint coordination of activities, and joint funding. 

Improving coordination mechanisms for knowledge sharing can set the stage for future coordination in development assistance if there is positive progress in the relationship between the international community and the DPRK

• Leadership will be needed to move forward the future knowledgesharing agenda discussed by this workshop, and this will most likely need to be provided by a core group of like-minded and committed international partners.

Bradley O. Babson, Consultant on Asian Affairs

Paul Beijer, Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs

Maria Castillo-Fernandez, Deputy Head of Delegation, European Commission Delegation to Korea

Bert Hofman, Chief, Economics Unit Beijing, The World Bank, China

Victor W. C. Hsu, National Director for DPRK, World Vision International, USA

Randy Ireson, Consultant, Rural Development Solutions, USA

Peter Jensen, Counsellor, Australian Agency for International Development, Australian Embassy in Beijing

Hyung-Gon Jeong, Research Fellow, Center for Northeast Asian Economic Cooperation, Korea Institute for International Economic Policy

Dongho Jo, Ewha Womans University, Korea

Ingrid Johansson, Deputy Head of Mission, Swedish Embassy in Pyongyang

Philo Kim, Research Professor, Institute for Unification Studies, Seoul National University

Tae Jin Kwon, Research Director, Korea Rural Economic Institute

Lee Chang-Jae, President, Korea Institute for International Economic Policy

Karin J. Lee, Executive Director, National Committee on North Korea, USA

Kyung Tae Lee, President, Korea Institute for International Economic Policy

Liu Ming, Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences

Brian McDonald, Head of Delegation, European Commission Delegation to Korea

Moon Chung-in, Ambassador for International Security Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Korea

Karim Morcos, Second Secretary, Development, Embassy of Canada in Beijing

Grant Morrison, Country Coordinator DPRK, Australian Agency for International Development, Australia

Sung-Wook Nam, Department of North Korean Studies, Korean University

Park Chan Bong, Deputy Assistant Minister, Senior Delegate to Inter Korean Dialogue, Ministry of Unification, Korea

Jin Park, KDI School of Public Policy and Management, Korea

Young-Ho Park, Director, Policy Planning and Coordination, Korea Institute for National Unification, Korea

Edward Reed, Country Representative, The Asia Foundation, Korea

Hazel Smith, Professor in International Relations, Department of Politics and International Studies, The University of Warwick, United Kingdom

Erich H. Weingartner, Executive Director, Weingartner Consulting, Canada

Deok Ryong Yoon, Senior Research Fellow, Korea Institute for International Economic Policy

Zang Hyoungsoo, Professor of Economics and Finance, Hanyang University

Katharina Zellweger, Country Director, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, DPRK

Affiliations are listed for identification purposes only. Participants attended as individuals rather than as representatives of their governments or organizations.

The Stanley Foundation is a nonpartisan, private operating foundation that seeks a secure peace with freedom and justice, built on world citizenship and effective global governance. 

It brings fresh voices and original ideas to debates on global and regional problems. 

The foundation advocates principled multilateralism—an approach that emphasizes working respectfully across differences to create fair, just, and lasting solutions. 

The Stanley Foundation’s work recognizes the essential roles of the policy community, media professionals, and the involved public in building sustainable peace. 

Its work aims to connect people from different backgrounds, often producing clarifying insights and innovative solutions. The foundation frequently collaborates with other organizations. 

It does not make grants. Stanley Foundation reports, publications, programs, and a wealth of other information are available on the Web at www.stanleyfoundation.org. 

The Stanley Foundation encourages use of this report for educational purposes. Any part of the material may be duplicated with proper acknowledgment. Additional copies are available. 

This report is available at http://reports.stanleyfoundation.org.

The Stanley Foundation

209 Iowa Avenue

Muscatine, IA 52761 USA

563-264-1500

563-264-0864 fax

info@stanleyfoundation.org

Production: Amy Bakke and Kathy Sunderbruch

Labels: United Nations, U.N., International Cooperation, DPRK,

Economic Development, Stanley Foundation

 

Advertisement

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

MaximsNews® LLC   NEWS NETWORK FOR THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

MaximsNews Network® LLC is a Global News Network that is read worldwide, in 195 countries and territories. It is associated with MediaChannel.org and Globalvision News Network, global news and media information services with more than 350 news affiliates in 135 countries. 

Established in 1999, MaximsNews now publishes in the six UN working languages: English, French, Arabic, Chinese, Russian and Spanish.  

SEE:  About MaximsNews

The views expressed are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of MaximsNews® LLC.

REACH THE WORLD'S MOST INFLUENTIAL PEOPLE  

SEE: Advertise with MaximsNews | MaximsNews MEDIA PARTNERSHIPS      

MaximsNews.com U.N. ® LLC  www.MaximsNews.com | MaximsNews@MaximsNews.com | Please contact us about Republishing: Syndication@MaximsNews.com ©Copyrights 1999 - 2008, MaximsNews® LLC. All rights reserved.